Yes, you are right TEXAS Anonymous. Everyone should be entitled to an opinion EXCEPT for a COURT JUDGE at a murder TRIAL.

As I keep saying, it might have been "legal" but it was still a lynching. Those were once legal too, you know?

And your state of Texas has the highest number of executions in our country. Better be careful there..........you never know who YOU might be mistaken for someday. Some famous celebrity might just come along and swear he heard your voice from 2 blocks away while sitting in a car with the windows rolled up.

You and anyone else are entitled to an opinion. You should, however, condition that opinion by admitting the history. In 1935 in New Jersey what Trenchard did was not illegal or considered unfair. It ... more

" it was still a lynching. Those were once legal too, you know? " I never knew that "lynchings were legal" !!! Where does it say that? Just because they happened doesn't mean they were "legal." Are... more

Are you serious? It's not at all confusing!Don't you understand what was meant by that?! It's like saying "They might as well have taken him out of his cell and lynched him." In other words, that... more

Maybe "perfect storm" would be a better description than "judicial lynching," which implies that Hauptmann was an innocent bystander. A cocky German defendant at a time (1935) of growing angst from... more

"A perfect storm. And OK...a judicial lynching as well." So, maybe we can now refer to it as a "perfect judicial lynching storm" ? There were so many "perfect storms" against Hauptmann - all over the ... more

Nice summary, Bob. Well done. I'm in the middle of Melsky's book, and he is starting to show that there was evidence of a second person involved in the crime, and that the police and detectives'... more

Richard, The frustrating part is that I had 3 editors. The last guy even corrected my footnotes! Of course that took me days to reverse. However, in the end, the publisher did not print the final... more

I was never satisfied that one person did it. The hard evidence could be photos of all the footprints, which Mike discusses. But the cops screwed up by not taking pics of all of them and protecting... more

Well, Mike, I look forward to vol.2. I assume you have reached a conclusion as to who dunnit and that you'll be revealing it in Vol.2. or maybe you'll only tell us that it's still not a sure thing.... more

If a tree falls in the woods, and there's a 1911 case that would allow for the testimony in a 1935 trial that it does not - do you care? I sure as hell don't. Perhaps other lawyers would enjoy that... more